Subscribe to download
Testing Rack(Muted Starter Motor vs Electric Motor)

Context for this vehicle's posting can be found
Here(reddit)

Try a vehicle made with the MSM engine here

Description, as originally posted.

The above test rack uses two batteries, one for each engine, and a torque sensor on both outputs(MAY affect RPS/Torque, I don't know personally)

The Electric motor has no gearing on it, it is fed raw to the 3x3 wheel + torque sensor.

The Starter motor is fed to 3x3 wheel + torque sensor through two gearboxes set to 3:1, facing towards the engine (a 1:9 ratio), which may be cheating I guess but *is* essential for getting more than 3RPS out of it, and the gearboxes don't bring it above the cost of the electric motor, only adding size/bulk to it.

Starter Motors

Pros: Power Efficient. As you can see in the footage, by the time the Muted Starter motor(3 starters working, 1 always off) engine hits 90% charge, the electric motor engine is already at 63% charge.

Cost Effective. The smallest Muted Starter Motor(1 starter working, 1 always off) only costs 255, minus battery.(Starter*2 = 60$, Driveshaft = 30, Crankshaft = 50, Clutch = 15, Gearbox*2 = 100) While a small Electric Motor costs 450 on its own.

Muted(Applicable only if one starter is off), Almost completely silent, rarely makes a low CLICK sound but otherwise, good for sneaking up on your friends with.

Cons: No Reverse. Electric motors can be given -1 to make them spin in reverse. You would need to add a gearbox and toggle it to reverse in this case.

Bulky. While an Electric motor is 1x1x1, the smallest proportions I can make a Muted Starter motor with are 2x2x5, 3x1x5, or 2x2x4. Unmuted Starters can be 2x1x5 or 1x2x5.

Less Precision. Apart from controlling the clutch, you can only turn individual starters on/off, or change the gearing.

Max Power of 3RPS before gearboxes.

Modular clutches, and all devices applied to the belt drive of the engine do not affect torque.

Torque table for modular engines:

1x1: Crankshaft(1.7) Belt Drive(0.6) Cylinder(0.93 or 1?)

3x3: Crankshaft(16) Belt Drive(5) Slim/3x1 Crankshaft(8.6?) Cylinder(11.95?)

5x5: Crankshaft(25.6?) Belt Drive(5) Cylinder(16)

3:1 Converter(8)

5:3 Converter(15)

? meaning I'm fairly certain this number is rounded in the final calculation or something else is happening to it.

This PROBABLY new technique abusing modular engine components MAY increase the efficiency of Diesel-Electric transmission, no promises are made since I only know DE is like 60% efficient according to others using electric motors, and I've never made a DE car myself.